Checked out what some 49ers fans are saying about the loss

He's capable, smart, instinctive, but he played a role in not winning the game when it was there to be had. He's probably 6 foot with an average arm, and you saw last night how it can play into a huge game, surrounded by huge men. I'm pretty sure Purdy can't see where he's throwing a good chunk of the time, and he's throwing to a spot where windows close fast.

In comment 16396733 JonC said:

Quote:

when they had opportunities, eg the CMC fumble, Purdy missing open receivers for TD, Kyle missed a few playcalls, where the fook was Kittle, etc. This is where teams need to know or learn how to finish a SB win. The muffed punt was a monster, it completely got KC re-engaged in the war for the remainder of the game.

agree, Jon. Went away from CMC too soon and went away from the quick slants/crossing patterns and outs too soon, which is where Purdy is solid. Shanahan went to the slower to develop patterns--did they hit one?-- and it took away all SF's rhythm.

ST muff, was a rookie, he had no clue what was going on in coverage, where the ball was.

In comment 16396740 eric2425ny said:

Quote:

In comment 16396736 logman said: Quote: SF probably wins The Lions made the same mistake against SF in the championship game.

Which makes it even worse! They only got by DET because tough guy Campbell didn't tell Johnson to keep running the fucking ball. Can you imagine Parcells allowing that to happen?

Shanahan has a track record of this, did the same as OC with the Falcons and let the Pats back in the game.

3 and outs, while only handing the ball to CMC once out of the nine plays was malpractice. He was grinding away tough yards on the D, and you could have kept controlling the ball. Really thought that was a poor way to come out.

In comment 16396725 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

Juxtapose that with some on BBI saying that Shanahan always thinking 3-4 steps ahead is smart.

It's funny when people who aren't smart try to make statements about what is and isn't smart.

I bet their message board has idiots just like this one does. You should check it out and report back to us. Let us know if they're like you.

In comment 16396739 eric2425ny said:

Quote:

that would have been a much different outcome.

Huh? How so?

Wilks and his unit were pretty much excellent all night, didn't get a lot of help from the offense, and just got beaten by an all time great at the end.

Mahomes would have done the same thing to any other DC, including Ryans.

He clearly has a great feel for the pocket, and avoided some sacks by moving laterally in the pocket, or stepping up as necessary. As others have said, at this point in time his arm strength probably lacks the elite downfield ability. Maybe he can improve upon that going forward.

Right now, he is on a cheap deal, so the 49ers have just about as much flexibility a team can have. They're qb situation is light years better than the Giants.

I wish we had their "issues".

At the end of the day, it was close and they lost to one of the greatest qb/coach combos of all time in OT.

NO team plays a perfect game. This is just the postmortem to channel the negative energy.

In comment 16396857 ManningLobsItBurressAlone said:

Quote:

3 and outs, while only handing the ball to CMC once out of the nine plays was malpractice. He was grinding away tough yards on the D, and you could have kept controlling the ball. Really thought that was a poor way to come out.

SPOT ON!

for beating a team with an elite QB and elite coaching can be very small. San Fran was clearly outplaying KC early on but the score was closer than the play on the field. I kept feeling this was not a good sign for SF chances. Once KC got some momentum, which was only a matter of time, they weren't going to give it back. Plus, that team (KC) has such confidence in winning by now, it was nearly a given they were going to win it if was close late, which is exactly what happened.

In comment 16396868 UberAlias said:

Quote:

for beating a team with an elite QB and elite coaching can be very small. San Fran was clearly outplaying KC early on but the score was closer than the play on the field. I kept feeling this was not a good sign for SF chances. Once KC got some momentum, which was only a matter of time, they weren't going to give it back. Plus, that team (KC) has such confidence in winning by now, it was nearly a given they were going to win it if was close late, which is exactly what happened.

another great point. leaving points on the field always comes back to haunt you.

But to me the two biggest factors was the special teams muff where it hit one of the blockers' leg and KC recovered, leading to the MVS score. It was an enormous momentum shift in the game. It's also completely fluke-y and unlucky. You can't blame it on the blocker...he's trying to block and he's not expected to see that ball. Maybe a communication thing, where the returner has to have an alert word he has to yell in that situation? Not sure. Just really unlucky for the 49ers there.

But also, an otherwise great game by Moody, he had that low extra-point kick that was blocked. To me, that was the 2nd biggest factor, allowing K.C. to only need a FG to take that game to OT. Perhaps they score a TD at the end of regulation and it wouldn't have mattered, but the play was still significant.

Sure, I agree with the criticism that Shanahan has to kick the ball away in OT rather than take it first. I thought that was a puzzling decision. And I wouldn't have criticized him for going for it rather than taking the 3, particularly in OT... but he left it on his defense against the greatest QB in the game. The bottom line is you kick it to Mahomes and take the 2nd possession knowing exactly what you need to win the game.

So for me, the first two situations aren't Shanahan's fault. I thought his team played very well. Purdy showed his classic poise on the biggest stage and seemed extremely prepared. The defense played very well all things considered, making multiple big stops throughout and holding the Chiefs down to under 20 points through 4 quarters.

I think it was two great teams that gave us a great game, both coaches deserve a ton of credit for how their teams performed, and for putting their teams in position to win a championship. I'm glad we got to watch a really fantastic game. And the only criticism I would give Shanny is the decision to take the ball first in OT.

KC stopped the Run cold, 49rs had to throw against a very good secondary -Spags knows D..

SF tried to run and couldnt get it going -3yrds a carry

KC special Teams was big strength all year, and was for the Supe

SF D played great, but the game plan all yr for KC - those watching knows - Keep game close and Let Ried and Mahomes figure out a way to get a winning score.. Great game.

Shannahan should have went on D in OT, but his D did look gassed.

The Oline - top 5 in the league
The WR - top 5 in the league
TE - Kittle - top 5 in the league
RB - McCaffrey & Mitchell - top 5 in the league

Shanahan is a superb play caller well.

Throw in that SF has a top 3 defense.

With all that said, at any point in the game last night were you thinking "Purdy's going to burn them deep here?"
No, it's not his game nor ability.
Maybe they can win a championship with Purdy (they have excelled in season and make it through the playoffs) but so far, small sample size, the model seems to come up short against elite teams.

decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did.

In comment 16396875 TheBlueprintNC said:

Quote:

KC stopped the Run cold, 49rs had to throw against a very good secondary -Spags knows D.. SF tried to run and couldnt get it going -3yrds a carry KC special Teams was big strength all year, and was for the Supe SF D played great, but the game plan all yr for KC - those watching knows - Keep game close and Let Ried and Mahomes figure out a way to get a winning score.. Great game. Shannahan should have went on D in OT, but his D did look gassed.

The 49ers ran all over the Chiefs in the first half. In the first two drives of the second half, the 49ers passed the ball six straight times, leading to two punts.

What I saw was a team that got away from the run.

You hold KC to 19 points in regulation, you absolutely have to win the game. End of story.

In comment 16396832 blueblood said:

Quote:

seriously they are the most loaded team... They dont really have a glaring hole...

They are very talented. I think one area they could get better at is at CB. Not that they are bad, but if they had another really great corner to pair with Ward I think it would serve them well.

In comment 16396885 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 16396875 TheBlueprintNC said: Quote: KC stopped the Run cold, 49rs had to throw against a very good secondary -Spags knows D.. SF tried to run and couldnt get it going -3yrds a carry KC special Teams was big strength all year, and was for the Supe SF D played great, but the game plan all yr for KC - those watching knows - Keep game close and Let Ried and Mahomes figure out a way to get a winning score.. Great game. Shannahan should have went on D in OT, but his D did look gassed. The 49ers ran all over the Chiefs in the first half. In the first two drives of the second half, the 49ers passed the ball six straight times, leading to two punts. What I saw was a team that got away from the run.

This^. Shanahan's play calling throughout the game was the problem. You have to beat Mahomes by limiting how many changes he has to beat you. SF did not do that.

to force the FG and give the ball back to Mahomes was the play of the game. They get 1st dwn 49rs win game with FG no time left.. Big play

In comment 16396879 Tom in NY said:

Quote:

The Oline - top 5 in the league With all that said, at any point in the game last night were you thinking "Purdy's going to burn them deep here?" No, it's not his game nor ability. Maybe they can win a championship with Purdy (they have excelled in season and make it through the playoffs) but so far, small sample size, the model seems to come up short against elite teams.

I understand that its where we are in society (to hate instead of appreciate)

And I understand that once someone on TV says something, then the masses seem to think the same thing.

But it was not one time in the superbowl where you thought to yourself "Brock Purdy is mid level" stop the cap man

Brock Purdy is good AF. He has all the goods. He almost outplayed the "2nd greatest QB OF ALL TIME"

He made a big play with his legs. 80% of his throws were dimes. He missed a couple plays but thats because Chris Jones caused some havoc.

And keep in mind, Purdy was going against some all pros!

answer this? from a football standpoint, what can Purdy NOT do?

In comment 16396884 SomeFan said:

Quote:

decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did.

What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring.

Is it still terrible decision to receive?

In comment 16396737 Breeze_94 said:

Quote:

But Chiefs had the much better QB and the championship DNA. There was ALOT less pressure on the Chiefs.

This sorta thing matters.....the championship DNA, less pressure.

So much of this stuff is psychological.

The crazy thing that you're underestimating though is that Chiefs defense, and you could say special teams as well. They won the game a little more than Mahomes did.

In crunch time it becomes very tough to beat certain QBs.

This might've been forgotten but they were saying the entire Chiefs offense and defense were frustrated in the first half.

Normally when I hear that happening, the team wins by a lot.

Insane shit.

or maybe a huge possible component of it, is

having a QB that is borderline good, and thus not looking to upgrade and/or not being in a position to do so.

Being cheap should not preclude looking for an upgrade. But he's good enough to help get them to the SB, so why should they? Then it's time to re-sign him, and he isn't going to be cheap, but hey, he got them to the SB, so it's a tough decision to jettison him.

There's worse hells to be in, but Purdy may get in the way of acquiring an upgrade.

On the flip side, he's only in his second year. His injury derailed their shot at the SB last year, and he played well enough this year to have a shot at winning it all. The arm strength and height aren't improving with age, but everything mental should improve with experience.

In comment 16396911 riceneggs said:

Quote:

In comment 16396884 SomeFan said: Quote: decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did. What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring. Is it still terrible decision to receive?

Well, we can assume anything. But if the score a TD, you are never going to punt so you give yourself an extra down to get a first down. It is putting your team in the best position to win. Your scenario doesn't really address the point.

In comment 16396917 SomeFan said:

Quote:

In comment 16396911 riceneggs said: Quote: In comment 16396884 SomeFan said: Quote: decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did. What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring. Is it still terrible decision to receive? Well, we can assume anything. But if the score a TD, you are never going to punt so you give yourself an extra down to get a first down. It is putting your team in the best position to win. Your scenario doesn't really address the point.

what point?

In comment 16396911 riceneggs said:

Quote:

In comment 16396884 SomeFan said: Quote: decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did. What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring. Is it still terrible decision to receive?

If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away?

In comment 16396725 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

Juxtapose that with some on BBI saying that Shanahan always thinking 3-4 steps ahead is smart.

Fans mad after a SB loss and finding tons of things to blame it on is the only is as predictable as the sunrise. Glad that now means Shanahan is think 14 steps ahead to his own detriment.

Is to assume that highly drafted or touted players will take time to develop while lower drafted players are finished products.

I see this bias all over the place.

There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start.

After Baltimore beat the Giants in 2001. Everyone was throwing Jim Fassel and the coaching staff under the bus, as well as Kerry Collins. When I look back at that game from a distance I can see that the Giants were simply outplayed by Baltimore, and the Ravens defence is one of the best the Giants ever faced in the SB.
Looking at that game last night, IMO both defences controlled the game. It could have been won by either team. It was a fine defensive game, and that's the type of game that I love. Spags is an awesome DC, and this was Steve Wilks 1st season as the 49ers DC. It makes me wonder what sort of job Jerome Henderson would have done if he was given the chance.

In comment 16396908 riceneggs said:

Quote:

In comment 16396879 Tom in NY said: Quote: The Oline - top 5 in the league With all that said, at any point in the game last night were you thinking "Purdy's going to burn them deep here?" No, it's not his game nor ability. Maybe they can win a championship with Purdy (they have excelled in season and make it through the playoffs) but so far, small sample size, the model seems to come up short against elite teams. I understand that its where we are in society (to hate instead of appreciate) And I understand that once someone on TV says something, then the masses seem to think the same thing. But it was not one time in the superbowl where you thought to yourself "Brock Purdy is mid level" stop the cap man Brock Purdy is good AF. He has all the goods. He almost outplayed the "2nd greatest QB OF ALL TIME" He made a big play with his legs. 80% of his throws were dimes. He missed a couple plays but thats because Chris Jones caused some havoc. And keep in mind, Purdy was going against some all pros! answer this? from a football standpoint, what can Purdy NOT do?

IMO he cannot win in the playoffs on another team right now.

In comment 16396927 cosmicj said:

Quote:

Is to assume that highly drafted or touted players will take time to develop while lower drafted players are finished products. I see this bias all over the place. There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start.

Sure but his limitations won’t improve in all likelihood - arm and athletic ability. So his ceiling is limited as a result. Can he get better at the rest? Sure, but it’s a big uphill battle with those limitations. He’s never going to be able to consistently pick up crucial 3rd downs with his legs, for example.

In comment 16396923 allstarjim said:

Quote:

If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game

this doesnt make sense (to me)

i'm receiving the ball with the intention of getting 7

I'm adding intense pressure to Pacheco (who's already fumbled once) and to that WR group that has come up small all season. I'm making sure I have Kelce locked up. Mahommes is Mahommes
_______________________________________________________

You kick it. Less pressure on the guys I mentioned above and now the intense pressure shifts to ....

Purdy - a second year QB
Deebo - who is playing on a bad hammy
Kittles - who is playing with a bad shoulder
CMC - who has already fumbled and is gassed
__________________________________________________________

From a mental perspective, I'd rather walk on the field with the mindset...

"guys, we're up 7, offense did its job, one stop and we're champs"

Mahones > Purdy

Can Purdy develop into a nice QB? Sure....but I see a lot of Kirk Cousins in his game....

Take away some of those weapons and he is Mac Jones.

2 things can be true here:

(1) Purdy is a huge asset to a playoff caliber team that affords them the luxury to use the cap on rest of the roster

(2) Purdy is not a franchise QB capable of leading a playoff team when his salary counts $40M+ of the cap

Criteria (2) is VERY hard. We've seen a number of teams put high quality teams on the field when they don't have the pay their QB. Being a high caliber team WHILE paying your QB a high salary requires a different level of QB.

In comment 16396923 allstarjim said:

Quote:

In comment 16396911 riceneggs said: Quote: In comment 16396884 SomeFan said: Quote: decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did. What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring. Is it still terrible decision to receive? If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away?

Because it's an even bigger advantage (by a wide margin) to possess the ball first in sudden death, and knowing what you need to do is only valuable if your opponent leaves any available points for you to surpass his score. If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death.

Taking the ball is the right decision. That does not mean that it leads to the winning outcome, because you still have to beat your opponent on the field.

In comment 16396930 SirLoinOfBeef said:

Quote:

IMO he cannot win in the playoffs on another team right now.

Why tho? Spell it out for me?

Purdy can't win with another team because?

Cause he isn't accurate? wrong
Cause he doesn't have pocket presence? wrong
Cause he has bad mechanics? wrong
Cause he can't throw the deep ball? wrong

Again, just tell me what he can't do please. thats all i'm asking. cause maybe i'm missing something

I mean, no QB is really winning a superbowl without a talented roster, lets be honest

look at the last 10-15 superbowl winners. all rosters were very good

In comment 16396940 Gatorade Dunk said:

Quote:

If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death.

say this louder! cause noone ever mentions this!!!

(it would take guts) but if you receive 1st, score and get 2...your winning % has to be in the 90s at that point

cause now your opponent has to get a TD, a 2 point conversion, and then stop you from getting in fg range!

Their QB is a back up.
Their offense didn’t have the same energy level in the second half. They looked gassed.
Defense couldn’t stop Mahomes and Co. like they did in first half.

That’s all I have.

In comment 16396936 GiantBlue said:

Quote:

Mahones > Purdy Can Purdy develop into a nice QB? Sure....but I see a lot of Kirk Cousins in his game.... Take away some of those weapons and he is Mac Jones.

Posts like this leave me speechless. There’s a segment of posters who literally don’t know what they’re talking about.

In comment 16396908 riceneggs said:

Quote:

In comment 16396879 Tom in NY said: Quote: The Oline - top 5 in the league With all that said, at any point in the game last night were you thinking "Purdy's going to burn them deep here?" No, it's not his game nor ability. Maybe they can win a championship with Purdy (they have excelled in season and make it through the playoffs) but so far, small sample size, the model seems to come up short against elite teams. I understand that its where we are in society (to hate instead of appreciate) And I understand that once someone on TV says something, then the masses seem to think the same thing. But it was not one time in the superbowl where you thought to yourself "Brock Purdy is mid level" stop the cap man Brock Purdy is good AF. He has all the goods. He almost outplayed the "2nd greatest QB OF ALL TIME" He made a big play with his legs. 80% of his throws were dimes. He missed a couple plays but thats because Chris Jones caused some havoc. And keep in mind, Purdy was going against some all pros! answer this? from a football standpoint, what can Purdy NOT do?

At not point in my post did I "hate rather than appreciate."
My point, giving SF and Purdy full credit for getting to the SB, is that eventually the mid-level QB is going to be force d to make high level plays that they are not capable of.
When did I come to this conclusion about Purdy?
I watched him since his freshman year at Iowa State. He was a good college QB, playing on solid teams at ISU but consistently demonstrated a mediocre to solid arm throughout his career.
You say that he "almost outplayed Mahomes." He never did that in the game, nor should be asked to (Mahomes is the Generational QB and a clear 1st ballot HOF). He operated the offense efficiently, getting to ball out to wide open receivers on short routes that allowed the receivers to run.
It's a great offense, but on a 3rd down with 2 minutes to go KC turned up the pressure and Purdy couldn't deliver.
As you point out, he's only in his 2nd season so perhaps he'll continue to get better. The question is, will the SF surrounding cast always be as good as what he had on the field yesterday?

Oh also, I wouldn't know what the TV announcers have to say about any of this. I never have my TV volume on as they tend to annoy me....and I rarely if ever watch pre-game shows/ESPN BS.

In comment 16396933 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

In comment 16396927 cosmicj said: Quote: Is to assume that highly drafted or touted players will take time to develop while lower drafted players are finished products. I see this bias all over the place. There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start. Sure but his limitations won’t improve in all likelihood - arm and athletic ability. So his ceiling is limited as a result. Can he get better at the rest? Sure, but it’s a big uphill battle with those limitations. He’s never going to be able to consistently pick up crucial 3rd downs with his legs, for example.

UConn - that’s an effective response. You would expect the more athletic players to have more growth potential. So is a bias that has some basis in reality but is taken entirely too far. Let me put it that way.

Purdy is reasonably fast, btw. He ran a 4.8 at the combine.

But he has enough talent to be a top ten starter in the NFL with his strong supporting cast. And with his minimal impact to the cap for the next two years, the roster will only get better. He can absolutely lead SF to a championship. It is why SF is already the favorite to win Super Bowl 59, despite yesterday's outcome.

And this is because Purdy may not have been able to win this game in overtime against arguably the best player and emerging dynasty in NFL history, but he was by no means the reason they lost it. In fact, he outplayed Tua, Josh and Lamar against this defense in this year's postseason. If not for the two deadly turnovers, the blocked extra point and Shanahan's head scratching abandonment of the run in the third quarter yesterday, Purdy would be a champion today.

In comment 16396940 Gatorade Dunk said:

Quote:

In comment 16396923 allstarjim said: Quote: In comment 16396911 riceneggs said: Quote: In comment 16396884 SomeFan said: Quote: decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did. What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring. Is it still terrible decision to receive? If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away? Because it's an even bigger advantage (by a wide margin) to possess the ball first in sudden death, and knowing what you need to do is only valuable if your opponent leaves any available points for you to surpass his score. If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death. Taking the ball is the right decision. That does not mean that it leads to the winning outcome, because you still have to beat your opponent on the field.

It's not sudden death, though. If you stop KC, you have the ball with needing only a FG to win. If they score, the pressure is on them to decide (and execute a 2 point try) without knowing if SF is even going to score. I think Reid in that scenario would just kick the extra point. Then even if KC scores, you know you can decide to tie it or go for 2 for the win, and you're not considering a FG or punt in that scenario.

It's a clear advantage to kick it away and know what you need to win when you get the ball (and you will get the ball regardless of what KC does). The pressure argument doesn't hold water for me. It's OT in the Super Bowl, there's already tremendous pressure no matter decision is made. They put themselves in a 4th down decision to kick a FG, which allowed KC to win the game with 6. Didn't need to do that.

Unless it's 4th and 7 or longer, I'm probably going for it if I'm deep in KC territory with the ball first. But if they had kicked, and KC scores, you know what you need. I don't see receiving the ball first is an advantage at all.

This was discussed in postgame and on SportsCenter at length, every analyst/commentator said that kicking it first would have been the better play.

In comment 16396960 cosmicj said:

Quote:

In comment 16396933 UConn4523 said: Quote: In comment 16396927 cosmicj said: Quote: Is to assume that highly drafted or touted players will take time to develop while lower drafted players are finished products. I see this bias all over the place. There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start. Sure but his limitations won’t improve in all likelihood - arm and athletic ability. So his ceiling is limited as a result. Can he get better at the rest? Sure, but it’s a big uphill battle with those limitations. He’s never going to be able to consistently pick up crucial 3rd downs with his legs, for example. UConn - that’s an effective response. You would expect the more athletic players to have more growth potential. So is a bias that has some basis in reality but is taken entirely too far. Let me put it that way. Purdy is reasonably fast, btw. He ran a 4.8 at the combine.

Purdy made big plays with his legs both last night and in the NFCCG. He's a good decision maker/processor, and accurate. I agree the supporting cast matters big with him, but he's a good QB.

In comment 16396927 cosmicj said:

Quote:

Is to assume that highly drafted or touted players will take time to develop while lower drafted players are finished products. I see this bias all over the place. There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start.

This is a fair point, and one that I am certain I am guilty of from time to time.
Purdy, at times, shows some of the traits that made Montana so difficult to play agains. JM was the perfect rhythm passer for Walsh's offense, but was also a good scrambler and had great feel for the game.
My issue with Purdy is that I have never seen him throw an out pattern with true pro level velocity (in college or NFL), nor have I seen him throw it deeper than 20 yards with any high level NFL velocity. I have seen him be efficient, intelligent, and able to hit short routes that are wide open with regularity.
He's 2 years into his career, so I think we can all agree he has been superb given the expectations of his low draft status. Let's see how he does when his team is not stacked to the gills at all levels.

In comment 16396950 Giant John said:

Quote:

Their QB is a back up. Their offense didn’t have the same energy level in the second half. They looked gassed. Defense couldn’t stop Mahomes and Co. like they did in first half. That’s all I have.

Purdy's a backup now?

I feel like we're at the portion of the program where every quarterback in the NFL sucks, except Patrick Mahomes. This happens every year around this time, with the exception of the years a different guy wins the Super Bowl. Then everyone except that guy and Patrick Mahomes suck.

In comment 16396966 allstarjim said:

Quote:

In comment 16396940 Gatorade Dunk said: Quote: In comment 16396923 allstarjim said: Quote: In comment 16396911 riceneggs said: Quote: In comment 16396884 SomeFan said: Quote: decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did. What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring. Is it still terrible decision to receive? If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away? Because it's an even bigger advantage (by a wide margin) to possess the ball first in sudden death, and knowing what you need to do is only valuable if your opponent leaves any available points for you to surpass his score. If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death. Taking the ball is the right decision. That does not mean that it leads to the winning outcome, because you still have to beat your opponent on the field. It's not sudden death, though. If you stop KC, you have the ball with needing only a FG to win. If they score, the pressure is on them to decide (and execute a 2 point try) without knowing if SF is even going to score. I think Reid in that scenario would just kick the extra point. Then even if KC scores, you know you can decide to tie it or go for 2 for the win, and you're not considering a FG or punt in that scenario. It's a clear advantage to kick it away and know what you need to win when you get the ball (and you will get the ball regardless of what KC does). The pressure argument doesn't hold water for me. It's OT in the Super Bowl, there's already tremendous pressure no matter decision is made. They put themselves in a 4th down decision to kick a FG, which allowed KC to win the game with 6. Didn't need to do that. Unless it's 4th and 7 or longer, I'm probably going for it if I'm deep in KC territory with the ball first. But if they had kicked, and KC scores, you know what you need. I don't see receiving the ball first is an advantage at all. This was discussed in postgame and on SportsCenter at length, every analyst/commentator said that kicking it first would have been the better play.

The third possession is absolutely sudden death. That's the bigger advantage, and you only get to be the first to possess the ball in that scenario by being the first to possess the ball in the original scenario.

I haven't run all the implied probabilities, but I do expect that the output would likely suggest that the options are actually pretty close to even, but that taking the ball first is slightly favorable.

And you don't need to quote ESPN's on-air personalities to make your point. I already think your point of view is more intelligent than theirs to begin with, and nothing they say would change my view (whereas I'm open to having my mind changed by someone like yourself whose intelligence I respect).

In comment 16396957 Tom in NY said:

Quote:

He operated the offense efficiently, getting to ball out to wide open receivers on short routes that allowed the receivers to run. It's a great offense, but on a 3rd down with 2 minutes to go KC turned up the pressure and Purdy couldn't deliver. As you point out, he's only in his 2nd season so perhaps he'll continue to get better.

"getting to ball out to wide open receivers on short routes"

you CLEARLY didnt watch the superbowl bro, clearly

and nobody is gonna deliver when you have Chris Jones comin at you unblocked

scroll thru some of these "dink n dunks"
purdy - ( New Window )